Algal Bloom

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA (Hartley—Leader of the Opposition) (14:15): My question is to the Premier. Does the Premier agree with the statements made in the Senate inquiry report? With your leave, sir, and with that of the house, I will explain.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Sorry, what was the question again please?

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: I asked the Premier: does the Premier agree with statements made in the Senate inquiry report, and I have asked for leave, sir.

Leave granted.

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: Ms Faith Coleman, an estuarine ecologist and citizen science community leader, told the committee that:

The messages now being broadcast are mixed, focused on economics and are often reactionary…

Those who have been out on the water, documenting the impacts, and those who were (in many cases still are) leading the science in the public sphere have been poorly recognised and integrated with the current government monologue. With the increased unpredictability of the climate, this alternating 'Nothing to see here' and 'Move aside, the Government is here to save the day' approaches to the wicked, adaptive issues are becoming less and less effective, meaning that all levels of political power (including community) need to become more comfortable with collaboration and uncertainty.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS (Croydon—Premier, Minister for Defence and Space Industries) (14:16): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. His remarks and his question refer to the need to cover off on multiple different elements here in regard to the harmful algal bloom. That speaks to why we have a summer plan that has three very distinct focuses.

Yes, it is true that part of the summer plan is very much orientated towards the human and economic implications of the impacts of the bloom. It is also true that we have another tranche of the program that focuses on its impact around people's way of life and trying to inform the public about these events as best as we can, notwithstanding the conspiracy theories espoused by some members opposite. The third element, which is very much an important focus, which goes to Ms Coleman's representations, is how we try to invest in the science, the research and the capacity for recovery but, in terms of the science and research effort, looking at the implications of climate change.

One of the things that comes out of the Senate inquiry that I think is worthy of consideration is how the commonwealth, more broadly, is constructing a framework that allows them to respond to natural disasters that emerge as a result of the tragedy that climate change will impose upon our natural world. The truth is, and the science tells us, that harmful algal blooms like this one won't be the only consequence of climate change.

On this side of the house, while we have various points of view and emphasis amongst us, what you will not find is any disagreement on whether or not climate change is real and whether or not that is worthy of a response from government and human beings more broadly. We are not sitting around debating the merits of doing something about climate change. We are not having a hyperpolarised, fragmented debate. We are not tearing ourselves apart about the merit of doing something about climate change. We accept the fact that it is real. We understand the fact that it will have consequences for our natural world and we recognise that it is worthy of policy effort.

For the commonwealth government, we do think the harmful algal bloom invites consideration of making sure our natural disaster framework has a mechanism in response to that. We welcome the fact that the Prime Minister announced his intention to ensure that there is an ecological disaster framework to contemplate events like this in the future. I wish it weren't true, but we are going to see other events like this manifest themselves because of climate change. It does invite, I think, as a Senate report suggests, effort being made at a federal level to gear up the architecture to respond to it.

As far as the here and now is concerned, what you see is a collaborative, integrated government effort, not just between the federal and the state governments with the $102 million investment but even with local government and also the not-for-profit sector and environmental organisations that I know the minister is working with on our reef restoration effort. I know the Minister for Sport and Recreation is working with surf lifesaving clubs across our state. The federal, state and local governments are working collaboratively with the not-for-profit sector to actually try to tackle this unprecedented challenge in the most coordinated way we can. We will continue to maintain that effort for as long as it is required to do so.

But we go into this summer well prepared and well planned, because we have been able to learn a lot over the course of the last few months and invest accordingly. We are very proud of that, and we look forward to the summer and taking on whatever challenges are thrown our way.